Madras High Court
Ashok vs State Represented By on 3 March, 2025
Author: P.Velmurugan
Bench: P.Velmurugan
Crl.A.No.219 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 03.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Criminal Appeal No.219 of 2025
Ashok ... Appellant
..vs..
State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Tiruvannamalai,
Crime No.13 of 2023. ... Respondent
Criminal Appeal filed under Sections 14 A (2) of SC/ST Act,
1989, to set aside the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special
Court for Exclusive of Trial Cases under POCSO Act, Tiruvannamalai in
Crl.M.P.No.47 of 2025 dated 24.01.2025 and enlarge the appellant on
bail in connection with the Spl.S.C.No.17 of 2024 on the file of the
Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive of Trial Cases under POCSO
Act, Tiruvannamalai.
Page No.1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2025 05:36:48 pm )
Crl.A.No.219 of 2025
For Appellant : Mr.V.Santhosh
For Respondent : Ms.G.V.Kasthuri
Additional Public Prosecutor
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed seeking to set aside the order
dated 24.01.2025 made in Crl.M.P.No.47 of 2025 by the learned Sessions
Judge, Special Court for Exclusive of Trial Cases under POCSO Act,
Tiruvannamalai, and to enlarge the appellant on bail in connection with
Spl.S.C.No.17 of 2024.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 28.08.2023, the de-facto
complainant, who is working as a painter took his children to his work
site and while his children were playing in the ground floor, the accused
allegedly abused his female child and hence, the case in Crime No.13 of
2023 was registered against the appellant herein/accused for the offences
under Sections 354(A)(1)(i) of IPC and Sections 7 r/w 8, 9(m) r/w 10 of
POCSO Act, 2012 and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2025 05:36:48 pm )
on 29.08.2023. Later he was released on bail. After completion of
investigation, final report was filed in Spl.S.C.No.17 of 2024 before the
Special Court for Exclusive of Trial Cases under POCSO Act,
Tiruvannamalai for the offences under Sections 366, 376AB and 511 IPC
and Section 9(m), 10, 6(1) and 18 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Sections
3(1)(w)(i) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 against the appellant.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is
an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He
further submitted that during trial the appellant was regularly appearing
before the Court below, but only for one hearing, due to mishearing of
the next hearing date, he has not appeared. Hence, the learned Magistrate
issued non-bailable warrant and the appellant was arrested and remanded
to judicial custody on 06.06.2024. The appellant is in judicial custody for
more than 230 days and hence, seeks for grant of bail. It is submitted that
if the appellant is not enlarged on bail, he will put into great loss and
hardship.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2025 05:36:48 pm )
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2025 05:36:48 pm )
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent-Police submitted that the offences committed by the appellant
would attract POCSO Act and SC/ST (POA) Act. She further submitted
that in this case, the trial has commenced and out of 19 witnesses, 6
witnesses have already been examined. Pending trial, the appellant
absconded and due to non appearance of the appellant, the proceedings
have been stalled and hence, the Court below issued non-bailable
warrant, later he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. If the
appellant is enlarged on bail, there is a possibility of tampering of
evidence and the trial of the case will be delayed. Hence, she strongly
objects to grant bail to the appellant.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent and also
perused the materials available on record.
6. It is needless to state as per Section 346 BNSS 2023, it is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2025 05:36:48 pm )
imperative that once the trial has commenced, the same has to be
conducted and completed on a day-to-day basis, except some inadvertent
circumstances and also if the examination-in-chief is over, the cross-
examination should be completed on the same day itself. In the instant
case, due to non-appearance of the appellant, the proceedings in
Spl.S.C.No.17 of 2024 was stalled and after issuing non-bailable warrant,
the appellant was arrested and remanded to judicial custody and hence,
the Court below dismissed the petition in Crl.M.P.No.47 of 2025 seeking
bail.
7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the
case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this
Court is of the view that the offences committed by the appellant is
serious in nature and there is a specific overtact as against the appellant
and if the appellant is enlarged on bail, there is a possibility of tampering
the evidence and protraction of trial. Hence, this is not a fit case to grant
bail to the appellant. However, the trial Court is directed to proceed with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2025 05:36:48 pm )
the trial and complete the trial on a day-to-day basis and dispose of the
case on merits and in accordance with law within a period of two months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With the above directions, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
03.03.2025
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
ms
To
1.The Session Judge,
Special Court for Exclusive of Trial Cases under POCSO Act,
Tiruvannamalai.
2. The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison, Vellore.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
4. The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Tiruvannamalai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2025 05:36:48 pm )
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
ms
03.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2025 05:36:48 pm )
